So I didn’t check out much of Tate and Peterson but from what little I have seen I had an easy time disliking them. I would not lump Goggins in with these people, because from what I know of him...
So I didn’t check out much of Tate and Peterson but from what little I have seen I had an easy time disliking them. I would not lump Goggins in with these people, because from what I know of him (which is, of course only what he shows) he does not represent the toxic masculinity that I associate with someone like Tate.
I was actually re-listening to “Can’t hurt me” when I read your comment. Goggins shows vulnerability and his way to overcome his traumatic life. I think there will always be things one could disagree with (IIRC he didn’t mention therapy anywhere) - but his overall message doesn’t seem externalized but more showing the potential one can unleash in themselves, if they put in the work and discipline.
Would love to hear other opinions. I didn’t read all of the article yet for context
I was recently dumped so I've been constantly listening to his interviews and his audiobooks on repeat for weeks now. I've been running a lot and eating better too, so I feel really good. It's...
I was recently dumped so I've been constantly listening to his interviews and his audiobooks on repeat for weeks now. I've been running a lot and eating better too, so I feel really good.
It's kind of funny, I think I've heard his story so many times, I could prolly tell it almost verbatim at this point lol.
Nothing like waking up every day and the first thing you hear being "ROCKY HAD TAKEN HIS SOUL"
Lmao, I'm a nutcase, but goddamn it if it isn't helping me
Yeah I get it. I started running last year and listened to cant hurt me then. It really got me into the self discipline. I’ve been working hard on my nutrition and fitness since. I found a lot of...
Yeah I get it.
I started running last year and listened to cant hurt me then. It really got me into the self discipline. I’ve been working hard on my nutrition and fitness since.
I found a lot of energy in his stories too. The other day during a 5k race when I felt like giving up, instead of slowing down, I sped up at the 4km mark, bringing my heartrate up close to 190, when I felt like giving up with a 180 average.
There’s so many limits that we impose on ourselves, I’m happy to have read can’t hurt me, and that I’m listening to it again now.
Since you're asking the question: yes, David Goggins is more than alright. Dude has kicked life's butt a hundred times over. That said, I think that the irony of someone choosing to identify as a...
Since you're asking the question: yes, David Goggins is more than alright. Dude has kicked life's butt a hundred times over.
That said, I think that the irony of someone choosing to identify as a 'sigma male' is letting someone else define what that means.
I think that there are aspects to this mindset that are valuable - mainly the idea of choosing your own definition of 'masculinity' and pursuing that instead of what is defined by social circumstance. All that's necessary is to look at what people have achieved and where their life path has taken them, and the more you align yourself with that life path then the closer you will get to comparable achievements.
If David Goggins is a good role model for you, by all means pursue that. When I look at his life's achievements, I'm not particularly keen to emulate them. I have a boatload of respect for what he's accomplished, but it's not anything I particularly want for myself.
If someone wants to be like Jordan Peterson or Andrew Tate, then I'd say go for it. I would personally rather not derive my worth from the approval or idolization of disillusioned teenage boys, so I don't do what they do.
JBP's Maps of Meaning is quite well done, though, so I think that recognizing nuance is important when it comes to this sort of thing. Some rhetorical questions for you: Why do you refer to him as 'a creep'? Is it because he specifically says things you disagree with, or is it because you have lumped him into a category based on other people's views? Have you taken the time to consider the views that he stands for within their context, and can you adequately express your disagreement with those views within that same context? Can you choose to agree with some things he stands for and disagree with others? Just some food for thought.
tl;dr don't let someone else pick your role models for you.
I upvoted you, but I think the most charitable reading is that the person you were responding to doesn't know much about Tate, and is just seeing the sort of "suave" bro-y persona rather than...
I upvoted you, but I think the most charitable reading is that the person you were responding to doesn't know much about Tate, and is just seeing the sort of "suave" bro-y persona rather than knowing about Tate's specific crimes.
that was my reading of their comment, indeed. isn't there a lesson there? (i do concede the presentation was snarky and hence probably not the most effective beyond making the first-order point. but)
that was my reading of their comment, indeed. isn't there a lesson there?
(i do concede the presentation was snarky and hence probably not the most effective beyond making the first-order point. but)
Yes. If you want to be a sex trafficker, ruin people's lives, become a widely hated human being and a poster child for everything that is wrong with 'machismo' in the 21st century, then get...
Yes. If you want to be a sex trafficker, ruin people's lives, become a widely hated human being and a poster child for everything that is wrong with 'machismo' in the 21st century, then get imprisoned and have your entire identity fall apart as you are ostracized and vilified during your sentence, then sure - try to be more like Andrew Tate.
Dude spewed hateful divisive rhetoric, and you can clearly see the result. As far as I'm concerned, it should be self-evident to anyone with faculties for reasoning that this is not someone to look up to. If I tell someone "don't do that because it's bad" then that is me imposing my morality and telling them that I know what is objectively right and wrong. This isn't my responsibility, and it would be paternalistic to believe it is. I can't speak objectively; all I have is my own value system which tells me that misogynistic and hateful behavior is not helpful because it makes life worse for the people I interact with.
And yea, @Starias if your basis for picking role models is appealing to women then you're still letting other people choose your values for you. If you're going that route, though, I might suggest picking up a bell hooks novel so that you can articulately pick apart everything that makes these people 'vile pieces of shit' instead of just calling them names.
I mean, I could also do that but then this discussion would be a whole lot less entertaining for everyone.
Goggins always says to not live the way he does, but to simply strive to achieve more than you think you can. I call Peterson a creep for a very simple reason: if I even mention him, it'll...
Goggins always says to not live the way he does, but to simply strive to achieve more than you think you can.
I call Peterson a creep for a very simple reason: if I even mention him, it'll instantly dry up every pussy within a mile radius of me. Same with Tate and even Rogan.
I've read and watched enough self-improvement media to the point where I've noticed most of it is saying the same things. In other words, if you read one self-help book, you've read them all. So why not pick one that's girl-safe? Lol.
Goggins is out there every day, getting after it, making the words he writes and says true. Peterson is whining about getting banned from Twitter lol
So you don't have any big issues with Tate or Peterson? Especially Andrew Tate has done some gruesome things: he is a convicted sex trafficer, sexual abuser and promotes extremely women-unfriendly...
So you don't have any big issues with Tate or Peterson? Especially Andrew Tate has done some gruesome things: he is a convicted sex trafficer, sexual abuser and promotes extremely women-unfriendly views (not girls, pet pieve of mine: girls makes it sound you only care about women as a thing to chase after). If I read your comment as-is (sarcasm on the internet and all), you're still only distancing yourself because it might hamper your dating life, not because he is a geniunely terrible human being.
I didn't expand on Tate because the other commenter seemed more focused on Peterson. Either way, let's stop trying to put words in my mouth, huh? To answer your question, they're both vile pieces...
I didn't expand on Tate because the other commenter seemed more focused on Peterson. Either way, let's stop trying to put words in my mouth, huh?
To answer your question, they're both vile pieces of shit and I don't condone anything they say or do. And before I get another editorial, yes, Tate is obviously the bigger piece of shit and he's getting what he deserves.
I'm sorry if I put words in your mouth, that wasn't my intention. As for mysoganistic, I was more getting at the human trafficking and sexual abuse of Andrew Tate. That's a lot worse than "just"...
I'm sorry if I put words in your mouth, that wasn't my intention. As for mysoganistic, I was more getting at the human trafficking and sexual abuse of Andrew Tate. That's a lot worse than "just" mysoginy.
"genuinely terrible human being" is also moralistic. I agree, but it presumes that the reasons why are self-evident, and if that were universally the case then he wouldn't have as many followers...
"genuinely terrible human being" is also moralistic. I agree, but it presumes that the reasons why are self-evident, and if that were universally the case then he wouldn't have as many followers as he does. It's much more helpful to say that his behaviors are pathological (governed by impulse) and without regard for the system of which he is a part (is this person even aware that someone gave birth to him?). Then it's an easy jump to say that his attitudes are socially cancerous.
A lot more young men will understand 'cancer bad' than 'misogyny bad', because they can get cancer.
It's not his views but his actions I am getting at. Human trafficking and sexual abuse are quite up there at the horribleness scale. I think even his followers agree to some extent because they...
It's not his views but his actions I am getting at. Human trafficking and sexual abuse are quite up there at the horribleness scale. I think even his followers agree to some extent because they either say that the alligations aren't true or they say the alligations are exagerated.
Is David Goggins alright? I love David Goggins, lol. I would be devastated if he was lumped in with creeps like Jordan Peterson and Andrew Tate
So I didn’t check out much of Tate and Peterson but from what little I have seen I had an easy time disliking them. I would not lump Goggins in with these people, because from what I know of him (which is, of course only what he shows) he does not represent the toxic masculinity that I associate with someone like Tate.
I was actually re-listening to “Can’t hurt me” when I read your comment. Goggins shows vulnerability and his way to overcome his traumatic life. I think there will always be things one could disagree with (IIRC he didn’t mention therapy anywhere) - but his overall message doesn’t seem externalized but more showing the potential one can unleash in themselves, if they put in the work and discipline.
Would love to hear other opinions. I didn’t read all of the article yet for context
I was recently dumped so I've been constantly listening to his interviews and his audiobooks on repeat for weeks now. I've been running a lot and eating better too, so I feel really good.
It's kind of funny, I think I've heard his story so many times, I could prolly tell it almost verbatim at this point lol.
Nothing like waking up every day and the first thing you hear being "ROCKY HAD TAKEN HIS SOUL"
Lmao, I'm a nutcase, but goddamn it if it isn't helping me
Yeah I get it.
I started running last year and listened to cant hurt me then. It really got me into the self discipline. I’ve been working hard on my nutrition and fitness since.
I found a lot of energy in his stories too. The other day during a 5k race when I felt like giving up, instead of slowing down, I sped up at the 4km mark, bringing my heartrate up close to 190, when I felt like giving up with a 180 average.
There’s so many limits that we impose on ourselves, I’m happy to have read can’t hurt me, and that I’m listening to it again now.
Since you're asking the question: yes, David Goggins is more than alright. Dude has kicked life's butt a hundred times over.
That said, I think that the irony of someone choosing to identify as a 'sigma male' is letting someone else define what that means.
I think that there are aspects to this mindset that are valuable - mainly the idea of choosing your own definition of 'masculinity' and pursuing that instead of what is defined by social circumstance. All that's necessary is to look at what people have achieved and where their life path has taken them, and the more you align yourself with that life path then the closer you will get to comparable achievements.
If David Goggins is a good role model for you, by all means pursue that. When I look at his life's achievements, I'm not particularly keen to emulate them. I have a boatload of respect for what he's accomplished, but it's not anything I particularly want for myself.
If someone wants to be like Jordan Peterson or Andrew Tate, then I'd say go for it. I would personally rather not derive my worth from the approval or idolization of disillusioned teenage boys, so I don't do what they do.
JBP's Maps of Meaning is quite well done, though, so I think that recognizing nuance is important when it comes to this sort of thing. Some rhetorical questions for you: Why do you refer to him as 'a creep'? Is it because he specifically says things you disagree with, or is it because you have lumped him into a category based on other people's views? Have you taken the time to consider the views that he stands for within their context, and can you adequately express your disagreement with those views within that same context? Can you choose to agree with some things he stands for and disagree with others? Just some food for thought.
tl;dr don't let someone else pick your role models for you.
if someone wants to be a sex trafficker, you'd say they should go for it..?
I upvoted you, but I think the most charitable reading is that the person you were responding to doesn't know much about Tate, and is just seeing the sort of "suave" bro-y persona rather than knowing about Tate's specific crimes.
that was my reading of their comment, indeed. isn't there a lesson there?
(i do concede the presentation was snarky and hence probably not the most effective beyond making the first-order point. but)
Yes. If you want to be a sex trafficker, ruin people's lives, become a widely hated human being and a poster child for everything that is wrong with 'machismo' in the 21st century, then get imprisoned and have your entire identity fall apart as you are ostracized and vilified during your sentence, then sure - try to be more like Andrew Tate.
Dude spewed hateful divisive rhetoric, and you can clearly see the result. As far as I'm concerned, it should be self-evident to anyone with faculties for reasoning that this is not someone to look up to. If I tell someone "don't do that because it's bad" then that is me imposing my morality and telling them that I know what is objectively right and wrong. This isn't my responsibility, and it would be paternalistic to believe it is. I can't speak objectively; all I have is my own value system which tells me that misogynistic and hateful behavior is not helpful because it makes life worse for the people I interact with.
And yea, @Starias if your basis for picking role models is appealing to women then you're still letting other people choose your values for you. If you're going that route, though, I might suggest picking up a bell hooks novel so that you can articulately pick apart everything that makes these people 'vile pieces of shit' instead of just calling them names.
I mean, I could also do that but then this discussion would be a whole lot less entertaining for everyone.
Goggins always says to not live the way he does, but to simply strive to achieve more than you think you can.
I call Peterson a creep for a very simple reason: if I even mention him, it'll instantly dry up every pussy within a mile radius of me. Same with Tate and even Rogan.
I've read and watched enough self-improvement media to the point where I've noticed most of it is saying the same things. In other words, if you read one self-help book, you've read them all. So why not pick one that's girl-safe? Lol.
Goggins is out there every day, getting after it, making the words he writes and says true. Peterson is whining about getting banned from Twitter lol
So you don't have any big issues with Tate or Peterson? Especially Andrew Tate has done some gruesome things: he is a convicted sex trafficer, sexual abuser and promotes extremely women-unfriendly views (not girls, pet pieve of mine: girls makes it sound you only care about women as a thing to chase after). If I read your comment as-is (sarcasm on the internet and all), you're still only distancing yourself because it might hamper your dating life, not because he is a geniunely terrible human being.
I didn't expand on Tate because the other commenter seemed more focused on Peterson. Either way, let's stop trying to put words in my mouth, huh?
To answer your question, they're both vile pieces of shit and I don't condone anything they say or do. And before I get another editorial, yes, Tate is obviously the bigger piece of shit and he's getting what he deserves.
Also you could just say misogynistic lol
I'm sorry if I put words in your mouth, that wasn't my intention. As for mysoganistic, I was more getting at the human trafficking and sexual abuse of Andrew Tate. That's a lot worse than "just" mysoginy.
"genuinely terrible human being" is also moralistic. I agree, but it presumes that the reasons why are self-evident, and if that were universally the case then he wouldn't have as many followers as he does. It's much more helpful to say that his behaviors are pathological (governed by impulse) and without regard for the system of which he is a part (is this person even aware that someone gave birth to him?). Then it's an easy jump to say that his attitudes are socially cancerous.
A lot more young men will understand 'cancer bad' than 'misogyny bad', because they can get cancer.
It's not his views but his actions I am getting at. Human trafficking and sexual abuse are quite up there at the horribleness scale. I think even his followers agree to some extent because they either say that the alligations aren't true or they say the alligations are exagerated.